Fannie Mae-No Politics (FNMA)

[Robert from yahoo bd]

Seems like a good argument to get in Dr. Dharan's supplement report:

"Dr. Dharan’s supplemental report includes additional analysis supporting his previously
stated opinions that the payment-in-kind option would have addressed FHFA’s purported reason
for agreeing to the Net Worth Sweep at least as effectively as the Net Worth Sweep without taking
100% of the GSEs’ profits, and thus without harming the GSEs and shareholders. Defendants
oppose supplementation of Dr. Dharan’s opinions on the payment-in-kind option, but their sole
discussion of the analysis asserts only that he could have offered the opinions at an earlier point.
Defendants do not attempt to identify any prejudice that they would suffer from permitting
supplementation. Further, they ignore that everything in the supplemental report appropriately
rebuts opinions on the payment-in-kind option that Defendants’ expert, Dr. Attari, offered for the
first time at trial.

As stated in Dr. Dharan’s supplemental report:

Dr. Attari’s rebuttal report did not address the viability of the PIK option provided in the
Certificates for potential use by GSEs. Nevertheless, he testified at trial that using the PIK
option would not have “solved the circular dividend problem,” and would instead have
made the GSEs’ situation “worse.” Dr. Attari’s testimony on this issue is incorrect.

ECF No. 291-1 (“Dharan Suppl. Rpt.”) ¶¶ 3–4 (citing Trial Tr. 1961:9–:13, 1964:7–:9) (emphasis
added).

Defendants disregard Dr. Attari’s testimony and nowhere dispute that Dr. Dharan’s
supplemental report appropriately responds to Dr. Attari testimony that was not disclosed until trial. That should be the end of the analysis, and Dr. Dharan’s testimony on the PIK option must
be permitted.

Indeed, by providing Dr. Dharan’s full rebuttal of Dr. Attari’s PIK testimony in a
supplement, Plaintiffs have given Defendants the opportunity to depose him on those opinions and
to offer a rebuttal report and have their expert address Dr. Dharan’s opinions in his testimony."